heavy strings

[timmy13]

Whats the heaviest strings you ever used? It seems like you should be able to use really heavy strings to get the fattest sound. Its not like you need to do any bending or anything. Why not get the biggest size available?

[Michael Henson]

I do a lot of bending for vibrato.

Sporting some DR Sunbeams on my Cirrus right now .130-.45, EB extra slinky's on my jazz .95-.40, and D'addario chromes in the same gauges for my fretless p. Of course, I don't know how fat of a sound you're wanting. Those tend to be plenty deep but still be refreshingly punchy...

[kyral210]

Well, I play a 5 string...

[lowfreaknzy]

I play 5 strings and this is my story:
On standard 34" scale basses i get a medium gage, but for my 35"s, I have to get the heavier strings. A heavier gage makes your 5th string sound less focused, (not much of a problem on a 35"), but in the other hand, It favors the high register, It makes my higher strings punchier and fatter because of the extra thickness and the extra tension.
My 2 cents

[knuckle_head]

I've used a .265 - okay for what it was.

Heaviest I use at present is a .190.

[unclejane]

Originally Posted by timmy13

Whats the heaviest strings you ever used? It seems like you should be able to use really heavy strings to get the fattest sound. Its not like you need to do any bending or anything. Why not get the biggest size available?

Actually, it tends to work the other way around - lighter gauge strings tend to give you the more aggressive, hefty sound. Heavier strings instead tend to add mellowness to the tone because of the higher tension. You don't get the sharper attack and the fundamental is generally a little more prominent.

I guess it depends somewhat on what you mean by "fat" - to me that means a hefty midbass with a good pop-like attack. For that, you want light gauge strings.

For a smooth sound with well defined fundamental, heavy gauge strings can contribute to that a bit, but then you have the higher tension to deal with and a little less versatility (i.e. if you want aggression when you dig in).


LS

[Bassman316]

Originally Posted by knuckle_head

I've used a .265 - okay for what it was.

Heaviest I use at present is a .190.

A .265!?? What the heck was that?

[rhapbus]

Originally Posted by Bassman316

A .265!?? What the heck was that?

A bridge support cable

[knuckle_head]

Originally Posted by unclejane

Actually, it tends to work the other way around - lighter gauge strings tend to give you the more aggressive, hefty sound. Heavier strings instead tend to add mellowness to the tone because of the higher tension. You don't get the sharper attack and the fundamental is generally a little more prominent.

I guess it depends somewhat on what you mean by "fat" - to me that means a hefty midbass with a good pop-like attack. For that, you want light gauge strings.

For a smooth sound with well defined fundamental, heavy gauge strings can contribute to that a bit, but then you have the higher tension to deal with and a little less versatility (i.e. if you want aggression when you dig in).


LS

My experience is a little different than yours, and to a degree I agree with some of what you suggest.

Heavier strings will be mellower based on construction. The more wraps there are the mellower they will be. It isn't that the fundamental is more prominent as much as the upper transients are compromised and just not there in some cases.

A slack/loose thinner string will present more fundamental than a tight thicker one in most cases - guitars are a great example. Guitars have half the string tension, and when a guitar and a bass approach unison they battle almost equally for low end prominence and reproduction.

All that said, a well constructed thick string can be wondrous - tight enough to allow consistent technique across the board, complete overtone series that allows all the strings to have the same sonic 'flavor' plus the ability to go lower if you choose to.

....my $.02

Originally Posted by Bassman316

A .265!?? What the heck was that?

I was working through gauges appropriate for C# and octave down B with La Bella a few years back. We ran a number of gauges with the .265 being the thickest. On a standard scale bass the tension to pitch made the .265 technically right for B. On my bass it worked for 13.75 Hz A. It even registers consistently on my old cassette-style Korg DT-1 tuner (I still have the string on a 5 string Quake that I need to deliver to a very patient client).

It works but it has its issues - IMO in never sounded like it belonged in the same string set as the similarly-tensioned thinner strings.

There are a couple of players that still use the .245 that was wound at that same time, Yves Carbonne being one of the most prominent. I understand as well that Garry Goodman is winding similar gauges - I have no experience with what he is winding.

[Bassman316]

13.75 Hz A? Sick.... Just when I thought I'd heard it all.

[mccartneyman]

.50 through .110 for a four-string. .44 through .136 on a fiver.

[rhapbus]

i use 110 - 55 on my 4

[bassist4dalord]

Ernie Ball Slinky .055-.110 on my Squier Precision, Rotosound 66 Swing Bass .045-.130 on my Squier Affinity Jazz V, and D'Addario Chromes .050-.105 on my Fender BG-31 ABG.

[MKoby]

Are you interested in 4, 5, or 6 strings?
Flat wound, half- or round wound?
What type of bass are you considering the strings for?

[knuckle_head]

Originally Posted by MKoby

Are you interested in 4, 5, or 6 strings?
Flat wound, half- or round wound?
What type of bass are you considering the strings for?

....and just as important - what do you want to tune to?